Sony Z1 and FX1 various questions 2004 - 2005

Jared VanLeuven · April 5th, 2005, 03:38 PM

Nope, no timelapse. I was bummed about it too. I wonder if they could even really implement the feature, what with the 15 GOP MPEG 2 and all. Chris brought up in an earlier thread that possibly a future upgrade of the Firestore FS-4 could do it, since it has time-lapse functions.

Chris Jothi · April 5th, 2005, 05:48 PM

At Creative Video in the UK the Z1 has actually gone up in price by about £150/£200!

I bought from then before the price jump (was in fact on their waiting list, until a week ago).

They are selling so damn well at the moment. Just thought I would reassure those who bought the Z1 that they may have doubted their purchase with the NAB show coming up, but with Sony pushing so many units and countless companies providing EXCELLENT equipment to enhance the filming experience it certainly is seeming the right choice for me.

Greg Jacobson · April 8th, 2005, 12:38 PM

I have a Z1 but need to buy another camera and was thinking about getting the FX1 and using a SD 302 mixer on it.

I would post this in the audio section but I am only interested in any concerns I should be aware of when using with the FX1.

The 302 mixer has 3 inputs so I can have 2 inputs mix down to one channel and one input on it's own separate channel?

Just making sure I can record to 2 separate channels on the FX1 when using a mixer or XLR adapter.

Any other possible issues I should be aware of?

Marco Leavitt · April 8th, 2005, 03:26 PM

You can switch the outputs on each channel individually to left, right or center. I don't know too much about the FX1, but the 302 can interface with just about anything. It has software adjustable attenuators 2 db increments going down to -16db and then from -40 db down to -56 db.

Brian Patterson · April 8th, 2005, 05:20 PM

I currently shoot with a VX 2000 and will be upgrading shortly. I already own a glidecam 2000. Is it going to be possible to easily use the FX1 or Z1U with my glidecam or do I need to upgrade it as well?

Jared Carey · April 9th, 2005, 01:21 AM

I am looking at purchasing 2 Z1U cameras for a wedding coming up. I would like to know how the camera works in real life situations, not on paper. I don't really need the camera to see in the dark, but would like to know if the camera is capable of a decent picture in HDV at a "typical wedding lighting". I am aware of all the technical parts of HDV, and have the software and tools needed to edit. So my question is, will these camera's do the job and be eye candy to the average person (not the average nitpick video professional found in this forum)?

Douglas Spotted Eagle · April 9th, 2005, 02:27 AM

Jared,
There are quite a few wedding folks using the Z1, and feel it's great. I'm not a wedding shooter, but have shot in some fairly dim areas. With up to about 9dB worth of gain, and even sometimes 12dB worth of gain, the cam will be fine if you need it.
Biggest thing to start with is calibrating the viewscreen just like you would with an NTSC monitor. Be sure you've got a solid image of the shoot prior to starting. Get white balance, and you'll most likely be very happy.

Chris Jothi · April 9th, 2005, 07:04 PM

I'm sorry but I have to vent a minor gripe with Sony.

The Z1 is positioned as a professional camera. Define professional as you like, but surely the in-built microphone and the awful AWFUL audio features such as the limiters and noise reduction are as far from professional as you can get.

The headphone jack (which is hidden underneath an unconvincing plastic flap, a long lasting Sony design) imo should have been pointing downwards, much like the firewire out. Just makes sense to me. It is also a cheap looking silver input!

The audio channel readings should be measured in decibels (someone tell me I can change this, or even Sony can offer some sort of software fix!?!).

These are things that would set REALLY set apart the Z1 from the FX1.

Really, the mic is not good enough imo. If you consider yourself to be a pro, this mic is just insufficient to produce audio of a respectable standard. It may work just fine for being on holidays (why oh my you would use this cam for that i do not know) but surely you're gonna want to buy an external mic (AT, Sennheiser, Sanken take your pick). BAD, BAD, BAD!

I can't be bothered to figure out what should go there in place of it, but all I know is that as a feature of the camera it is borderline USELESS!

Let me reiterate however that the Z1, and these criticisms should not devalue the worth to those who have and will buy it. I love it and am constantly impressed by the results it produces.

I just feel that audio is extremely important, equal to visuals, and sure enough people can say "well get a sound recordist and record dual system" but I say that this is besides the point. Sony really messed up with the audio on the PD150. Hiss galore and substandard line inputs. This was their chance to nail it, and they didn't. Why I ask?

Christopher C. Murphy · April 9th, 2005, 07:23 PM

There is a new thread with a guy having some issues with his rig...you might want to bang heads with him. It's a recent thread..

George Ellis · April 13th, 2005, 05:24 AM

Just a FYI really. I have not had a chance to go to my local video reseller to look. While in Fry's, there it was sitting in with the VX2100 and GL-2. One of our sponsors is cheaper (MSRP at Fry's), but I have to hope on a plane to go there ;) Put I got to touch it, hold it, and tell the salesman some of the stuff about it that makes it special. Oh, they have the JVC HDV right next to it.

Mike Tiffee · April 13th, 2005, 11:30 AM

They've had them for awhile now and charge full price.. as of yesterday they were still $3699.00. And my Fry's didn't even have it hooked up to a monitor, much less a HD monitor. I wonder how many FX-1's Fry's purchased- just to display, and how many they've actually sold. Like you said, the sales person didn't even understand the camera. It's just sitting like any other camera, on a shelf, all beat up. They should have the thing over by the HDTV's, hooked up showing what all it can do.

Alex Raskin · April 13th, 2005, 01:12 PM

Sound Devices MM-1: anyone used it with FX1? Results?

Christopher Haering · April 15th, 2005, 08:54 AM

hi sean,
i use the camrera frame mode and the color correction on the DaVinci.

best regards
christopher häring

Philip Melia · April 16th, 2005, 09:05 AM

Hi there, DV Community...

Am thinking about getting the Sony FX1 as a second camera as I won't be needing the XLR inputs that the more expensive Z1 provides. What I need to know is will the FX1 provide full resolution (ie: 576 lines for PAL TV format) in standard DV 16:9 mode?

Dominic Jones · April 16th, 2005, 11:32 AM

Hi Philip,

Essentially, the answer to your question is yes...

In fact what's happening is:

The camera takes an image at 1440x1080 resolution (this to be precise interpolated from a 960x1080 CCD array) and then resamples it to 720x405 (which is 16:9 at SD resolution) before storing it anamorphically (i.e. vertically stretched) as 720x576 (4:3 SD PAL).

When displayed on a 16:9 PAL monitor it will be unsqueezed to give you 720x405 (although actually both these values will be smaller as a fair amount of this falls outside the action safe area and is not shown on a TV).

So the 16:9 resolution is, finally, only 405 lines - as it must be for PAL (remember PAL is a 4:3 standard), but this is coming from an anamorphic source at 576 lines.

Also, if you wanna get really into it, these pixels are non-square (you will notice that (1440/16)x9 does *not* give you 1080, but rather 810!) meaning that, if converted to square pixels, you would have an effective end ratio of 1920x1080 for your CCD resolution, which would then be scaled down to 720x405 to fit the PAL specifications (although in practice it is actually a 720x576 image with black bars at the top and bottom to fill the spare space).

If what you mean is "Is it true 16x9", then pretty much, yes (you'll get a bit of argument over the pixel shift used to generate the 1440 horizontal pixels from 960 actual CCD pixels, but I think most would agree that's a minor point).

Ultimately, you're going to get as good a 16:9 PAL image from an FX-1 as you will from anything but the very highest end of DVCam cameras, costing many thousands more than the FX-1 (or Z1, for that matter).

Hope that helps!....

April 5th, 2005, 05:48 PM	#167
Chris Jothi Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 74	Gone up in price! At Creative Video in the UK the Z1 has actually gone up in price by about £150/£200! I bought from then before the price jump (was in fact on their waiting list, until a week ago). They are selling so damn well at the moment. Just thought I would reassure those who bought the Z1 that they may have doubted their purchase with the NAB show coming up, but with Sony pushing so many units and countless companies providing EXCELLENT equipment to enhance the filming experience it certainly is seeming the right choice for me.

April 8th, 2005, 12:38 PM	#168
Greg Jacobson Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: New York Posts: 141	Using a Sound Devices 302 with FX1 I have a Z1 but need to buy another camera and was thinking about getting the FX1 and using a SD 302 mixer on it. I would post this in the audio section but I am only interested in any concerns I should be aware of when using with the FX1. The 302 mixer has 3 inputs so I can have 2 inputs mix down to one channel and one input on it's own separate channel? Just making sure I can record to 2 separate channels on the FX1 when using a mixer or XLR adapter. Any other possible issues I should be aware of?

April 8th, 2005, 05:20 PM	#170
Brian Patterson Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 51	FX1 or Z1U with Glidecam 2000? I currently shoot with a VX 2000 and will be upgrading shortly. I already own a glidecam 2000. Is it going to be possible to easily use the FX1 or Z1U with my glidecam or do I need to upgrade it as well?

April 9th, 2005, 01:21 AM	#171
Jared Carey New Boot Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Santa Clara Posts: 19	Sony Z1U for Wedding Use? I am looking at purchasing 2 Z1U cameras for a wedding coming up. I would like to know how the camera works in real life situations, not on paper. I don't really need the camera to see in the dark, but would like to know if the camera is capable of a decent picture in HDV at a "typical wedding lighting". I am aware of all the technical parts of HDV, and have the software and tools needed to edit. So my question is, will these camera's do the job and be eye candy to the average person (not the average nitpick video professional found in this forum)?

April 9th, 2005, 02:27 AM	#172
Douglas Spotted Eagle VASST Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Stockton, UT Posts: 5,648	Jared, There are quite a few wedding folks using the Z1, and feel it's great. I'm not a wedding shooter, but have shot in some fairly dim areas. With up to about 9dB worth of gain, and even sometimes 12dB worth of gain, the cam will be fine if you need it. Biggest thing to start with is calibrating the viewscreen just like you would with an NTSC monitor. Be sure you've got a solid image of the shoot prior to starting. Get white balance, and you'll most likely be very happy. __________________ Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com

April 5th, 2005, 03:38 PM	#166
Jared VanLeuven New Boot Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Salt Lake City, Utah Posts: 21	Nope, no timelapse. I was bummed about it too. I wonder if they could even really implement the feature, what with the 15 GOP MPEG 2 and all. Chris brought up in an earlier thread that possibly a future upgrade of the Firestore FS-4 could do it, since it has time-lapse functions.

April 8th, 2005, 03:26 PM	#169
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	You can switch the outputs on each channel individually to left, right or center. I don't know too much about the FX1, but the 302 can interface with just about anything. It has software adjustable attenuators 2 db increments going down to -16db and then from -40 db down to -56 db.

April 9th, 2005, 07:04 PM	#173
Chris Jothi Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 74	Stupid mic! I'm sorry but I have to vent a minor gripe with Sony. The Z1 is positioned as a professional camera. Define professional as you like, but surely the in-built microphone and the awful AWFUL audio features such as the limiters and noise reduction are as far from professional as you can get. The headphone jack (which is hidden underneath an unconvincing plastic flap, a long lasting Sony design) imo should have been pointing downwards, much like the firewire out. Just makes sense to me. It is also a cheap looking silver input! The audio channel readings should be measured in decibels (someone tell me I can change this, or even Sony can offer some sort of software fix!?!). These are things that would set REALLY set apart the Z1 from the FX1. Really, the mic is not good enough imo. If you consider yourself to be a pro, this mic is just insufficient to produce audio of a respectable standard. It may work just fine for being on holidays (why oh my you would use this cam for that i do not know) but surely you're gonna want to buy an external mic (AT, Sennheiser, Sanken take your pick). BAD, BAD, BAD! I can't be bothered to figure out what should go there in place of it, but all I know is that as a feature of the camera it is borderline USELESS! Let me reiterate however that the Z1, and these criticisms should not devalue the worth to those who have and will buy it. I love it and am constantly impressed by the results it produces. I just feel that audio is extremely important, equal to visuals, and sure enough people can say "well get a sound recordist and record dual system" but I say that this is besides the point. Sony really messed up with the audio on the PD150. Hiss galore and substandard line inputs. This was their chance to nail it, and they didn't. Why I ask?

April 9th, 2005, 07:23 PM	#174
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	There is a new thread with a guy having some issues with his rig...you might want to bang heads with him. It's a recent thread.. __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

April 13th, 2005, 05:24 AM	#175
George Ellis Trustee Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Suwanee, GA Posts: 1,241	Fry's now sells HFX-1s Just a FYI really. I have not had a chance to go to my local video reseller to look. While in Fry's, there it was sitting in with the VX2100 and GL-2. One of our sponsors is cheaper (MSRP at Fry's), but I have to hope on a plane to go there ;) Put I got to touch it, hold it, and tell the salesman some of the stuff about it that makes it special. Oh, they have the JVC HDV right next to it.

April 13th, 2005, 11:30 AM	#176
Mike Tiffee Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 150	They've had them for awhile now and charge full price.. as of yesterday they were still $3699.00. And my Fry's didn't even have it hooked up to a monitor, much less a HD monitor. I wonder how many FX-1's Fry's purchased- just to display, and how many they've actually sold. Like you said, the sales person didn't even understand the camera. It's just sitting like any other camera, on a shelf, all beat up. They should have the thing over by the HDTV's, hooked up showing what all it can do.

April 13th, 2005, 01:12 PM	#177
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	XLR adapter for FX1 Sound Devices MM-1: anyone used it with FX1? Results?

April 15th, 2005, 08:54 AM	#178
Christopher Haering New Boot Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Berlin. Germany Posts: 11	frame mode hi sean, i use the camrera frame mode and the color correction on the DaVinci. best regards christopher häring __________________ chris

April 16th, 2005, 09:05 AM	#179
Philip Melia New Boot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 12	Sony FX1 DV 16:9 resolution Hi there, DV Community... Am thinking about getting the Sony FX1 as a second camera as I won't be needing the XLR inputs that the more expensive Z1 provides. What I need to know is will the FX1 provide full resolution (ie: 576 lines for PAL TV format) in standard DV 16:9 mode?

April 16th, 2005, 11:32 AM	#180
Dominic Jones Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Brighton, England Posts: 225	Hi Philip, Essentially, the answer to your question is yes... In fact what's happening is: The camera takes an image at 1440x1080 resolution (this to be precise interpolated from a 960x1080 CCD array) and then resamples it to 720x405 (which is 16:9 at SD resolution) before storing it anamorphically (i.e. vertically stretched) as 720x576 (4:3 SD PAL). When displayed on a 16:9 PAL monitor it will be unsqueezed to give you 720x405 (although actually both these values will be smaller as a fair amount of this falls outside the action safe area and is not shown on a TV). So the 16:9 resolution is, finally, only 405 lines - as it must be for PAL (remember PAL is a 4:3 standard), but this is coming from an anamorphic source at 576 lines. Also, if you wanna get really into it, these pixels are non-square (you will notice that (1440/16)x9 does not give you 1080, but rather 810!) meaning that, if converted to square pixels, you would have an effective end ratio of 1920x1080 for your CCD resolution, which would then be scaled down to 720x405 to fit the PAL specifications (although in practice it is actually a 720x576 image with black bars at the top and bottom to fill the spare space). If what you mean is "Is it true 16x9", then pretty much, yes (you'll get a bit of argument over the pixel shift used to generate the 1440 horizontal pixels from 960 actual CCD pixels, but I think most would agree that's a minor point). Ultimately, you're going to get as good a 16:9 PAL image from an FX-1 as you will from anything but the very highest end of DVCam cameras, costing many thousands more than the FX-1 (or Z1, for that matter). Hope that helps!....